J Adv Prosthodont.  2017 Oct;9(5):358-363. 10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.358.

Verification of a computer-aided replica technique for evaluating prosthesis adaptation using statistical agreement analysis

• Mai HN
• Lee KE
• Lee KB
• Jeong SM
• Lee SJ
• Lee CH
• An SY
• Lee DH

• KMID: 2393221
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4047/jap.2017.9.5.358

Abstract

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of computer-aided replica technique (CART) by calculating its agreement with the replica technique (RT), using statistical agreement analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A prepared metal die and a metal crown were fabricated. The gap between the restoration and abutment was replicated using silicone indicator paste (n = 25). Gap measurements differed in the control (RT) and experimental (CART) groups. In the RT group, the silicone replica was manually sectioned, and the marginal and occlusal gaps were measured using a microscope. In the CART group, the gap was digitized using optical scanning and image superimposition, and the gaps were measured using a software program. The agreement between the measurement techniques was evaluated by using the 95% Bland-Altman limits of agreement and concordance correlation coefficients (CCC). The least acceptable CCC was 0.90.
RESULTS
The RT and CART groups showed linear association, with a strong positive correlation in gap measurements, but without significant differences. The 95% limits of agreement between the paired gap measurements were 3.84% and 7.08% of the mean. The lower 95% confidence limits of CCC were 0.9676 and 0.9188 for the marginal and occlusal gap measurements, respectively, and the values were greater than the allowed limit.
CONCLUSION
The CART is a reliable digital approach for evaluating the fit accuracy of fixed dental prostheses.

Keyword

Computer-aided replica technique; Concordance correlation coefficient analysis; Prosthesis adaptation; Reliability; Verification; Silicone replica technique

MeSH Terms

Crowns
Dental Prosthesis
Prostheses and Implants*
Replica Techniques*
Silicon
Silicones
Silicon
Silicones

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1 Metal die and crown.

• 

  Fig. 2 Silicone replica on metal die.

• 

  Fig. 3 Fit evaluation in replica technique. (A) Manual sectioning of silicone replica on the buccolingual plane, (B) Marginal gap measurement using microscope, (C) Occlusal gap measurement using a microscope.

• 

  Fig. 4 Fit evaluation in computer-aided replica technique. (A) Digital sectioning of 3D image of gap space in the buccolingual plane, (B) Marginal gap measurement using a software program, (C) Occlusal gap measurement using software program.

• 

  Fig. 5 Scatter plots of replica technique and computer-aided replica technique. (A) Marginal gap, (B) Occlusal gap. The red line represents a 45-degree line.

• 

  Fig. 6 Bland-Altman plots for reliability of gap measurements. (A) Marginal gap, (B) Occlusal gap.

Reference

1. Holmes JR, Bayne SC, Holland GA, Sulik WD. Considerations in measurement of marginal fit. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 62:405–408. PMID: 2685240.

2. Pimenta MA, Frasca LC, Lopes R, Rivaldo E. Evaluation of marginal and internal fit of ceramic and metallic crown copings using x-ray microtomography (micro-CT) technology. J Prosthet Dent. 2015; 114:223–228. PMID: 25882975.

3. Contrepois M, Soenen A, Bartala M, Laviole O. Marginal adaptation of ceramic crowns: a systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2013; 110:447–454. PMID: 24120071.

4. Boitelle P, Mawussi B, Tapie L, Fromentin O. A systematic review of CAD/CAM fit restoration evaluations. J Oral Rehabil. 2014; 41:853–874. PMID: 24952991.

5. Torabi K, Vojdani M, Giti R, Taghva M, Pardis S. The effect of various veneering techniques on the marginal fit of zirconia copings. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015; 7:233–239. PMID: 26140175.

6. Ji MK, Park JH, Park SW, Yun KD, Oh GJ, Lim HP. Evaluation of marginal fit of 2 CAD-CAM anatomic contour zirconia crown systems and lithium disilicate glass-ceramic crown. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015; 7:271–277. PMID: 26330973.

7. Bugurman BB, Turker SB. Clinical gap changes after porcelain firing cycles of zirconia fixed dentures. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014; 6:177–184. PMID: 25006381.

8. Lee WS, Kim WC, Kim HY, Kim WT, Kim JH. Evaluation of different approaches for using a laser scanner in digitization of dental impressions. J Adv Prosthodont. 2014; 6:22–29. PMID: 24605202.

9. Falk A, Vult von, Fransson H, Thorén MM. Reliability of the impression replica technique. Int J Prosthodont. 2015; 28:179–180. PMID: 25822305.

10. Laurent M, Scheer P, Dejou J, Laborde G. Clinical evaluation of the marginal fit of cast crowns-validation of the silicone replica method. J Oral Rehabil. 2008; 35:116–122. PMID: 18197844.

11. Rahme HY, Tehini GE, Adib SM, Ardo AS, Rifai KT. In vitro evaluation of the “replica technique” in the measurement of the fit of Procera crowns. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2008; 9:25–32.

12. Coli P, Karlsson S. Fit of a new pressure-sintered zirconium dioxide coping. Int J Prosthodont. 2004; 17:59–64. PMID: 15008234.

13. Chan DC, Blackman R, Kaiser DA, Chung K. The effect of sprue design on the marginal accuracy of titanium castings. J Oral Rehabil. 1998; 25:424–429. PMID: 9687114.

14. Kim KB, Kim JH, Kim WC, Kim JH. Three-dimensional evaluation of gaps associated with fixed dental prostheses fabricated with new technologies. J Prosthet Dent. 2014; 112:1432–1436. PMID: 25218032.

15. Lee DH. Digital approach to assessing the 3-dimensional misfit of fixed dental prostheses. J Prosthet Dent. 2016; 116:836–839. PMID: 27460325.

16. Lin L, Hedayat AS, Sinha B, Yang M. Statistical methods in assessing agreement: Models, issues, and tools. J Am Stat Assoc. 2002; 97:257–270.

17. Barnhart HX, Haber M, Song J. Overall concordance correlation coefficient for evaluating agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics. 2002; 58:1020–1027. PMID: 12495158.

18. Watson PF, Petrie A. Method agreement analysis: a review of correct methodology. Theriogenology. 2010; 73:1167–1179. PMID: 20138353.

19. Lin LI. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 1989; 45:255–268. PMID: 2720055.

20. King TS, Chinchilli VM, Wang KL, Carrasco JL. A class of repeated measures concordance correlation coefficients. J Biopharm Stat. 2007; 17:653–672. PMID: 17613646.

21. Lawrence I, Lin K. Assay validation using the concordance correlation coefficient. Biometrics. 1992; 48:599–604.

22. Cerna M, Ferreira R, Zaror C, Navarro P, Sandoval P. Validity and reliability of the T-Scan(®) III for measuring force under laboratory conditions. J Oral Rehabil. 2015; 42:544–551. PMID: 25727489.

23. King TS, Chinchilli VM. Robust estimators of the concordance correlation coefficient. J Biopharm Stat. 2001; 11:83–105. PMID: 11725932.

24. Vonesh EF, Chinchilli VM, Pu K. Goodness-of-fit in generalized nonlinear mixed-effects models. Biometrics. 1996; 52:572–587. PMID: 10766504.

25. Lopez-Suarez C, Gonzalo E, Pelaez J, Serrano B, Suarez MJ. Marginal vertical discrepancies of monolithic and veneered zirconia and metal-ceramic three-unit posterior fixed dental prostheses. Int J Prosthodont. 2016; 29:256–258. PMID: 27148985.

26. Kokubo Y, Nagayama Y, Tsumita M, Ohkubo C, Fukushima S, Vult von. Clinical marginal and internal gaps of In-Ceram crowns fabricated using the GN-I system. J Oral Rehabil. 2005; 32:753–758. PMID: 16159354.

27. Giavarina D. Understanding bland altman analysis. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2015; 25:141–151. PMID: 26110027.

28. Rhee YK, Huh YH, Cho LR, Park CJ. Comparison of intraoral scanning and conventional impression techniques using 3-dimensional superimposition. J Adv Prosthodont. 2015; 7:460–467. PMID: 26816576.